Fuji X-M1 vs Sony Nex 6 - a user comparison

Discussion in 'Featured Articles, Reviews & Posts' started by Ray Sachs, Aug 17, 2013.

  1. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Lounge Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    5,582
    Location:
    Not too far from Philly
    Real Name:
    you should be able to figure it out...
    So, I’m shooting a couple of new loaners – the Fuji XM-1 and the Sony Nex 6, both with their 16-50 kit zoom lenses and they're similar enough that you can't shoot with both without comparing them. These two camera bodies are fairly similar in a lot of ways (with a couple of key differences), are priced about the same, so they seemed like two good cameras to pair up. I also have the new 27mm pancake lens for the Fuji and the not-at-all new 24mm f1.8 Zeiss lens for the Sony – a bit more on those later…

    Both bodies are about the same size, both have onboard flashes and both have dual control wheels. They both feel reasonably well built to me – the Fuji has been criticized on this but I’m not feeling it. It seems to weigh about what a small camera should and it doesn’t feel like its gonna fall apart on me. They both have flip up rear LCDs that are great for “from the waist” shooting (or overhead I guess, but I rarely use them that way). The biggest “feature” difference is that the Nex 6 has a great built-in EVF located in the upper left corner of the camera while the XM-1 is the first of Fuji’s APS X-series cameras NOT to have an EVF (or ‘hybrid’ EVF/OVF) – it relies SOLELY on the LCD for framing. Pretty similar packages other than the EVF/no EVF difference.

    Both also have some version of wi-fi functionality but I have no experience or interest in using a camera to beam stuff up, so I can’t tell you if one is more functional than the other. Also, both have video capabilities and my general impression is that Nex takes video MUCH more seriously than Fuji, so I’d guess the Nex is far better in this regard too, but this is not based on any personal experience…

    They both have fairly similar APS 16mp sensors, the Fuji with its X-Trans sensor and the Sony with a more traditional Bayer color array. I’m not going to get into the technical nits of these sensors – the issues, both pro and con, with the X-Trans have been well litigated all over the internet and I have nothing to add. I think both are great sensors with slightly different strengths, but I love ‘em both.

    I tend to judge cameras mostly from my particular perspective as a street shooter with a pretty specific set of preferences. Neither of these cameras really floats my boat for this application, but the Fuji has one really big advantage over the Nex in this regard. This has to do with the ability to manually focus to a specific distance for purposes of zone focusing.

    ZONE FOCUSSING:

    The Fuji has one thing that every camera should have, but the Sony, like every Sony I’ve used other than the RX1, inexplicably do NOT have. The Fuji has a distance scale. Its on the screen, rather than the lens barrel (unless you’re using their 14mm lens, which does have a scale on the lens), it comes with a depth of field scale that’s approximately useless, but it has a distance scale that you can take to the bank. Even using the zoom lens – I’d heard some reports that the focus scale was off with the 18-55 zoom with earlier firmware, but with the 16-50 and the XM-1’s initial firmware, it appears to be dead on. A couple of zone focused shots from the Fuji at 16mm, in bright light and low light:

    [​IMG]
    Fuji XM1-66-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    Fuji XM1-223-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

    The Nex doesn’t have anything like a distance scale, making it a no-go for me. It does have a very visible implementation of “focus peaking” (the Fuji has a much weaker version of focus peaking), which you can theoretically use to pre-visualize your depth of field and manually pre-focus to have the “zone” you want in focus, but my experience trying to use this technique has been enormously frustrating – the peaking seems to show a much larger area in focus than turns out to actually BE in focus in the resulting shot. So I’d end up with a lot of badly out of focus shots, even in pretty good light, and particularly in lower light.

    What this means is the Nex is not useable for the kind of street shooting I do except in the brightest possible light, where you can dial in so much depth of field that its almost impossible to have any part of the shot NOT in focus – and yet even in those conditions I was very hit or miss with the Nex. But in lower light, I could zone focus the Fuji with confidence while I couldn’t use the Nex at all. Here are a couple of OK zone focus shots from the Nex at 24mm in very good light, but I had lots of misses too, and no good examples in low light, with either lens:

    [​IMG]
    Nex 6 Philly-268-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    Nex 6 Philly-290-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr
    Advertisement

    Now, if you use auto-focus for your street shooting, the Nex is as good as the Fuji, maybe better because its auto-focus, which has a PDAF assist to the CDAF system, is noticeably faster than the Fuji. Also, either of these cameras can be used with adapters and legacy lenses that have distance scales right on the lens. Our friend Don “Streetshooter” Springer is doing beautiful work with the Nex 6 using mostly (maybe exclusively) manual lenses. If you haven’t visited his Flickr stream recently, do yourself a favor and check it out – he’s doing good work with the Ricoh GR too. But with the Nex’s native lenses, zone focus is a no-go.

    AUTO-ISO:

    The other thing I’ve become an unreasonable stickler about since I got spoiled using the Nikon “A” for street shooting is how a camera enables auto-ISO. With the Nikon A in aperture priority mode, I can designate a maximum ISO (6400) and minimum shutter speed (up to 1/1000 of a second – I use 1/500), and almost never have to think about ISO or shutter speed again. In good light, it will pick the lowest ISO it can while still using 1/500 shutter speed. In low light, I know that once the ISO is pegged at 6400 and there’s not enough light to maintain my fast shutter speed, the shutter speed will come down as far as it needs to for a proper exposure. So I keep an eye on it to adjust my shooting style, but I know the camera is doing exactly what I’d be doing to the settings to reach the right balance for the situation. So I don’t need to think about it and I find this incredibly liberating.

    The only other cameras that come close to as good a setup for my purposes are some recent Ricohs, including the GR. The only problem with these is that they limit the minimum shutter speed to a high of 1/250 of a second – I get blurred shots from my own hand and body movements at 1/250 pretty regularly (I shoot while moving a lot), while at 1/500 on the Nikon I almost never do. The GR has a pretty workable auto-ISO in a version of manual mode (TaV), but it still requires keeping an eye on and changing shutter speeds quite a bit as the light changes…

    Neither the Sony or the Fuji come close to this level of function in either aperture priority or manual mode. The Fuji at least HAS a minimum shutter speed in aperture priority mode, but the minimum shutter speed can only be set as high as 1/125, totally useless for my purposes. Auto-ISO also works in manual mode on the Fuji, but you can’t use the exposure compensation adjustment with it, rendering it pretty useless as well. The Sony is worse in both modes. In aperture priority there’s no user setting for minimum shutter speed – the camera just seems to default to 1/60 whenever possible. And in manual mode, auto-ISO does not work at ALL – with or without exposure compensation!

    On either camera you can do things the old-fashioned way and just change the ISO manually as the light changes. I did this manually for years and never minded in the least. My favorite cameras for this type of adjustment were the Ricohs because of how instantly accessible the ISO adjustment was. But now that I’ve been spoiled by the Nikon’s amazing auto-ISO setup, no other system will do for street shooting and I found both the Fuji and Sony very frustrating. I must stress that this is for my own highly specific sets of wants and needs and might not be relevant to anyone else, but that’s the only perspective I’ve got, so it’s the only one I can share…

    EVERYTHING ELSE (non-street specific):

    In pretty much every other way, outside of my own highly specific street shooting preferences, both of these cameras are enormously good and competent, and even versatile, given the lens choices.

    The controls on the Fuji are different than on the earlier APS X-series cams. There’s no shutter speed dial and there’s no specific exposure compensation dial. And there IS a traditional mode dial. But it has dual control wheels and is a breeze to adjust settings on. Its exposure compensation setup is as nice as on the other cameras because the dial that’s used for exposure compensation in either aperture or shutter priority mode and in program mode is located in exactly the same place as the dedicated exposure comp dial on the other cameras, is ALWAYS armed and ready to turn, and it even has clicks/détentes like the other dial – it merely lacks the markings so you have to check how its set on the screen. The controls on this camera are a breeze and well laid out, if not exactly the same as on the other Fuji X-models.

    Controls on the Nex are Nex style controls, which are different than any other cameras I’ve used. Many don’t like them – I don’t love them in theory, but in practice they work well enough once you adapt to them. And the Nex 6 even has a mode dial – a Nex first I believe. It also has two control dials. One small nit for me is that the exposure comp (an adjustment I tend to use a lot for any type of shooting) requires a button to be pressed to arm the wheel each time you want to adjust it. The good news is that the button is the bottom of the dial you turn (on the four way controller), so once you get used to it, it’s a pretty trivial matter.

    For less frequently used controls, the Fuji uses their “Q” button, which brings up a screen with a zillion different adjustments that can be changed right from that screen. This is similar to Olympus’ super control panel, Nikon’s “I” button, and sort of similar to Panasonic’s quick menu. Very intuitive and quick one-stop shopping for nearly anything you need. The Sony takes an approach somewhat closer to Ricoh where a particular fn button (ADJ button on the Ricoh), brings up a user defined list of a handful of adjustments that can be made from there. The good news with this approach is that since the user defines what’s there, its just how you want it and only the stuff YOU want on that menu will show up. The downside is you have to menu-dive for the other lesser-used functions.

    Neither of these cameras has a physical switch for selecting between manual and auto-focus. On both you can get to this adjustment from the “Q” button or “fn” button. On the Sony it’s also easy to program one of the other buttons, like the AEL button, to toggle between auto and manual focus. On the Fuji you just have to use the Q button…

    LENSES:

    I don’t have anything to back any of this up from a technical perspective, but I much preferred the Fuji version of the 16-50 to the Nex version. The Nex version is very small and light, which is nice, while the Fuji is a much larger lens – very similar to the 18-55 – but feels smoother in operation and seems visually sharper to me (it does have a plastic mount though, which some seem to dislike - never mattered to me). I could be biased because I got so many MF misfires with the Sony, which is the camera’s fault rather than the lens, and I might be influenced by the popular opinion I’ve read of the two lenses. So take this with at least a grain of salt. The Nex has a power zoom option and just feels cheap in comparison, but I don’t know that it’s a worse lens – I just perceive that it is. And I’m not gonna shoot any brick walls to test my perceptions!

    In terms of the Fuji 27mm f2.8 pancake and the Zeiss 24mm f1.8, both are fine lenses. The Zeiss will run you $1100, so it’s a premium lens that doesn’t appear to me to be THAT nice to me – its not super sharp although its quite good. It renders pretty nicely, as it damn well should! And its pretty fast so is probably the best available low light lens in the Nex system today. I may do a brief comparison of the Nex 6 with this lens vs the RX1 at some point later. I like this lens but I don’t know that I’d pay $1100 for it. But this is from a guy who paid crazy money for an RX1 at the same focal length, so I might just be full of hot air… If I had a Nex, I'd want this lens, but I don't think I'd buy a Nex just because of this lens. Here are a couple of basic scenic type shots with the 24mm, in case you can glean anything from them:

    [​IMG]
    Nex 6 Philly-182-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    Nex 6 Philly-232-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

    The Fuji 27 is much more of a value at $450 and I’d say its hitting above its weight. It doesn’t have an aperture ring, but the aperture controls on the XM and the other Fuji’s work well enough without it, and it appears quite sharp and clean throughout the aperture range, although its best stopped down a bit. It’s AF is also quite fast, rather notable among Fuji lenses. This is not a focal length I’d particularly want, but if I did, I’d be really happy to have this little lens. Here are a couple of scenic and one street shot (using AF, not zone focus) from the 27mm:

    [​IMG]
    XM1 Philly-3-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    Fuji XM1-143-Edit-2 by ramboorider1, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    XM1 Philly-5-Edit by ramboorider1, on Flickr

    In general, the lens lineup of the Fuji line has been considered a strength, with its three great primes initially released with the X-Pro, the 14mm, and the zooms its released since all getting high marks. With a 10-24 ultra-wide and both very fast 23 and 56mm primes slated to come out fairly soon, lenses should never be a weak point for anyone considering one of the Fuji X-cameras.

    Nex lenses have been a real issue in the past, but recent and projected releases indicates Sony is finally getting it somewhat together in that respect. The 24 f1.8 is a great lens, there’s now a 20mm wide angle to go along with the original and much maligned 16mm pancake. There are also telephoto options and a recent 10-18mm ultra wide angle. I don’t think Nex lenses are the weakness they originally were seen as, but any potential buyer should check the available lenses to see if they meet your needs. See Pavel’s review of the Samsung 60mm macro lens for a concise and informative rundown on the current NEX lens offerings.

    CONCLUSIONS:

    No real strong conclusions here. I likely wouldn’t buy either of these cameras because of their weaknesses for street use, but I’d be happy with either for all-around shooting. I’d be more likely to choose the Sony because of the excellent EVF built into the body and the really nice grip (I may have neglected to mention the grip?), but I’d probably be more likely to choose the Fuji based on preferring their lens lineup and the slightly more intuitive controls. It would be tough to go wrong with either of these cameras if they’re to your liking and meets your needs. Just two more amazingly good, amazingly small, APS sensor based cameras that would have seemed like outrageous miracles just a few years ago and are now just very nice but sort of run of the mill alternatives to many other good ones out there… Times are good!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. BBW

    BBW Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member S.C. Charter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    13,210
    Location:
    NW corner of CT
    Real Name:
    BB
    Thanks, as always, Ray for your conversational and informative style of reviewing. Decisions, decisions...:026: Maybe they'll sell the X-M1 with the 10-24 at some point?
     
  3. Armanius

    Armanius Bring Jack back! Subscribing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    4,203
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Real Name:
    Jack
    Thanks for the review Ray. Extremely informative as always, especially for a wanna be street photographer.

    I'm perplexed by the limitations imposed on usage of the auto ISO by most camera makers. If cameras are going to have that function, it should be to the fullest extent possible to maximize usability.

    In the RX1, is it possible to use auto ISO in M mode?

    How's the face detection in the XM1?

    Thanks!
     
  4. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Lounge Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    5,582
    Location:
    Not too far from Philly
    Real Name:
    you should be able to figure it out...
    I kinda doubt it - the 10-24 is likely to be at least half again the price of this camera body - maybe twice the price. I'd probably still rather have the XE1 with the EVF, but maybe an XE2 will be along with a tilt-screen and an EVF??? And if I was going to be shooting any normal focal length lenses, I'd still prefer the X-Pro to both, with its hybrid OVF/EVF...

    -Ray
     
  5. BBW

    BBW Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member S.C. Charter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    13,210
    Location:
    NW corner of CT
    Real Name:
    BB
    True, true about the lens prices. These are all very important things to weigh for someone who is considering getting into the interchangeable lens Fuji camera world.
     
  6. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Lounge Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    5,582
    Location:
    Not too far from Philly
    Real Name:
    you should be able to figure it out...
    I sort of think the whole idea of auto-ISO was developed before the sensors were anywhere near as good as they are today and it was designed with the more limited sensors in mind. But with the amazing range that these sensors have, most cameras just feel hamstrung to me. Admittedly, for a lot of kinds of shooting, almost any sort of auto-ISO, even that in the Nex 6, will do. But anytime the shutter speed starts to matter or the tradeoffs between shutter speed and ISO, you just can't use it. With the Nikon, I can program it do pretty much exactly what I would do if I was making the adjustments manually, which is what you really want from an auto mode. To be able to set it up to carry out YOUR preferred changes. The Ricoh approach is very close, just lacks a bit in minimum shutter speed. But nothing else is even close, at least among the stuff that I've shot with. Its really discouraging because it seems like such a no-brainer and so easy to implement.

    The RX1 works great for auto ISO in manual mode. You can set both high and LOW ISO (the low ISO setting can force it to choose a higher shutter speed when you're shooting in aperture priority, so its sort of a work-around) and the exposure compensation works with it.. So, that's a lot better than its little brothers and sisters in the Nex line where auto ISO is totally disabled in manual mode. But honestly, after using it in a variety of ways, I don't find auto ISO in manual mode all that great because you still have to monitor the ISO and adjust the shutter speed to keep it in a reasonable range. And I ultimately don't find that any easier than just using manual ISO in aperture priority mode - there you watch the shutter speed and adjust the ISO to keep it all in line. Really sort of six of one, half a dozen of the other. But when you have an adequately high minimum shutter speed in aperture priority mode and once it maxes out the ISO it reduced the shutter speed below that, THAT is a system that requires almost no further attention - just let it do its thing and it frees you up to just make sure you're using the right aperture for what you're shooting and to work the exposure comp for stuff like shooting out of shadows or back lighting or whatever. So, the auto ISO is great in manual mode on the RX1, but I still don't find that a particularly useful approach.

    I hadn't tried the face detection on either camera, but I just did and both seemed to work quite well. Its a bit more of a PIA to get to on the Sony because you have to set the AF to multi-area before you can select it, where the Fuji just seems to understand what it needs to do to make it work if you select it. But once invoked, both seem to handle it very well...

    -Ray
     
  7. wt21

    wt21 Lounge All-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,983
    Ray, I'm really disappointed with the plastic build quality of the XM1. Reminds me of the EPL2, though I am remembering (perhaps mistakenly) that the EPL2 was better.

    I've usually poo-pooed build quality complaints, but this XM1 does feel like the case could crack with a drop, and the shutter release feels flimsy. Mine sounds like a cheap piece of plastic over an audible coiled spring.

    Any thoughts on yours?
     
  8. aleksanderpolo

    aleksanderpolo Lounge Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    112
    Real Name:
    Polo
    Ray, if one use one of the aperture-less X lens on the older mode dial-less body, is there a software mode dial that one can use to change from say A mode to S mode? How does it work?
     
  9. Garylh

    Garylh Lounge Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    406
    Location:
    Contra Costa County, California
    Thanks Ray.. Good writeup. Pretty nailed it between the way I think about the Nex vs Fuji designs and how they work.

    I been thinking since the announcement that the xm1 w/ 27 was the perfect kit.. The 16-50 was another matter, now I think I would e ok w/ getting the xm1 kit.. Most likely the 16-50 would end up on my xe1 though if I decide to go for it.

    I am one of those that do not mind plastic bodies. I bought a Nikon fg20 w/ 35-70 for a trip a long time ago (back about a year after they were released). It got knocked around a lot and I still have that beat up body still today. Maybe I am just lucky, but that left me the impression of not worrying about it being plastic.

    Gary
     
  10. Garylh

    Garylh Lounge Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    406
    Location:
    Contra Costa County, California
    I have the 27 that I use on the xe1 and xp1.

    The mag button button used for manual focus now doubles as a aperture adjustment dial. When u turn it past f16 on the 27, u go to A mode.

    Gary
     
  11. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Lounge Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    5,582
    Location:
    Not too far from Philly
    Real Name:
    you should be able to figure it out...
    It really doesn't feel notably different from the XE1, other than its smaller. I don't know - I may just not be all that picky about this kind of thing, but I've never reacted that way to the feel of a camera. I guess if its lighter it somehow feels less substantial - the RX1 is obviously built like a damn TANK but that may just be due to its weight. But I've never had one that felt like it was gonna fall apart in my hands and, conversely, never had one that I thought it would be a good idea to go around dropping. I've never really seriously damaged a camera except once by tightning down a cheap thumbs-up knockoff too much and busting through a hot-shoe, but that was on a rock solid camera and was purely user error, errr.... stupidity... I don't like that the shutter button isn't threaded for a cable release or a soft release, but it feels OK in use as is. Overall, its feels about how I'd expect a camera of its size to feel - not like a brick, but solid enough. I'd seen your reaction to it, but I just didn't have the same feeling.

    -Ray
     
  12. aleksanderpolo

    aleksanderpolo Lounge Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    112
    Real Name:
    Polo
    Thanks Gary. I mean aperture priority -> shutter priority. With a physical dial it would be easier (still not as easy as a mode dial though I think) to turn the S knob and a physical aperture ring to switch mode. But without aperture ring scrolling from f2.8 all the way pass f16 to A with a scroll wheel sounds like a backward idea. That's why I am wondering if they update the firmware in XE1 and XP1 to enable a software mode dial or something like that? I am also wondering if it is a good idea to mix and match two different design philosophy in a system...

    On the Sony side, it is mind-boggling why they can't implement the auto-ISO of RX1 in their NEX line, it's like they are made by two different departments that don't talk to each other... maybe that's the case.
     
  13. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Lounge Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    5,582
    Location:
    Not too far from Philly
    Real Name:
    you should be able to figure it out...
    It works pretty much like the ones with an aperture ring. You adjust the aperture with the adjustment dial to the left of the thumb grip (that thing finally has SOMETHING to do in life!) and when you go past f22, the mode indicator (always shown on the screen) switches out of "A". If you're in auto on the shutter speed dial, it switches first to manual, and then another click moves it to program. If the shutter speed is set to a particular speed, you'll be in manual while you move through the aperture settings, and then past f22, it switches to shutter priority. It's all quite simple and logical in use...

    Edit - Ooops - I missed that Gary had already answered this.

    -Ray
     
  14. serhan

    serhan Lounge All-Pro

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,443
    Location:
    NYC
    Thanks for the comparison review.

    Nex 16-50mm zoom lens doesn't have the greatest IQ esp on the corners with auto distortion correction. Also electronic zooming sucks compared to mechanical zooming, but it makes the combo comparable to panasonic LX size and range. So it is for P&S upgraders or people who are looking for P&S size high IQ cameras. More comparable to XM1, nex-3n with 16-50 was selling $300-350 used, $450 new. I had better night shots w nex-6+16-50 then RX100 due to the nex 6 grip/viewfinder. Finally nex is getting high quality 16-70 f/4 Zeiss zoom which should make the nex line more attractive, esp with the new 24MP AA'less nex 7. But then it will be pricey compared to Fuji std zoom combo's. For more complete native nex lenses with reviews, you can check the lens database in our nex forum (which includes the new Zeiss Touit lenses too):
    Sony NEX lens database

    For nex cameras, the level of focus peaking has to be changed depending on the light and the contrast of the lens. You can misfocus easily. I prefer the 5x zoom for precise focusing, much better then any af cameras. Also for street photography I think rf lenses is a better workaround with nex compared to native lenses. You can shoot with fixed S shutter speed and the lens has the aperture/dof ctrl and the camera adjust the auto iso. Freddytto on nex forum has very good street photos from NY w/ cheap Russian rf lenses. His latest jupiter 8 review with nex 7 is very good:
    Nex7 and Jupiter-8 50mm f2.0
     
  15. stratokaster

    stratokaster Lounge Top Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2010
    Messages:
    823
    Location:
    Kiev, Ukraine
    Real Name:
    Pavel
    I must also add that the shutter priority mode of Sony NEX-6 is particularly useless for low-light shooting: it will not open the lens past f/4 and will raise the sensitivity all the way to ISO 3200 instead! Combined with lack of minimum shutter speed setting in the aperture priority mode, this makes this camera somewhat challenging to shoot if your light is changing quickly.
     
  16. pictogramax

    pictogramax Lounge Top Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2011
    Messages:
    871
    Location:
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Thanks for interesting read, Ray! Have you tried manual focusin with magnified view on Nex6?

    If you set lower button customizable button for magnified view, it is fairly easy and convenient. Just lower your thumb from control wheel, one press brings large magnified view to fine-tune the distance (zone) you want and with a half-press of shutter you're back and ready to go. It became a second nature for me as I shoot mu Nex3 with legacy glass for two years now, and is much more precise that peaking (which I do not find too dependable also).
     
  17. serhan

    serhan Lounge All-Pro

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,443
    Location:
    NYC
    Min shutter speeds for nex 5 was 1/30 which is increased to 1/60 sec for the newer 5n/6 models. RX100 has still has 1/30 sec and RX1 has 1/80 sec in aperture priority. They should try to fix that by making adjustable but it hasn't happened yet. Usually with manual lenses upto 50mm 1/60 works w/ nex but for longer eg 100mm macro I had to adjust S priority.

     
  18. serhan

    serhan Lounge All-Pro

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,443
    Location:
    NYC
    I like the peaking w/ manified view:) Other approach might be using B&W jpgs w/ min peaking, which I haven't tried.

     
  19. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Lounge Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    5,582
    Location:
    Not too far from Philly
    Real Name:
    you should be able to figure it out...
    I've used it that way on the RX1, but I was trying to use it with the full view just to visualize DOF on the Nex. If I was using legacy glass, I suspect I'd use it for critical focus and use the focus distance scale on the lens for setting up zone focus. I was just trying to use it as a work around for zone focus and found it didn't work too well in that context. I think Serhan's comment, above, about changing the levels depending on the light and the contrast of the lens to avoid mis-focussing. I probably had it set to HIGH, so its no wonder that it was showing more in focus than was actually the case...

    -Ray
     
  20. norman shearer

    norman shearer Lounge Veteran

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Messages:
    407
    Location:
    Corby, Northants, England
    Nice comparison review Ray. I can certainly relate to your take on the 2 cameras regarding street shooting. With the NEX series zone focusing with a Voigtlander or Leica adapted lens is probably the best way to go. For those that shoot with a VF then maybe the AF is just about good enough for most shoots but personally I think the 5N AF is dismal and I expect the NEX 6 is only marginally better. I like to be able to just push that shutter home at the right moment rather than wait an indeterminate time for the AF to catch up. There are so many variables to contend with when street shooting it's best to simplify when you have the opportunity. That's why I can appreciate your fondness of the Nikon A. With the E-PL5 I can set no minimum shutter speed so have to either pick a suitably high iso or shoot in shutter priority mode.

    You've used the E-PL5 Ray. Can you give me your view on how the shutter button compares with the NEX 6? I find the Sony NEX 5N button a lot less responsive and am sure I sometimes introduce blur into a shot as a result. With both cams I basically have them round my neck and cradle the underside of the camera with my thumb resting on the shutter so I can shoot whenever without arm/hand movements giving away my intentions. I adapted that style with the E-PL5 because it's so damn small and easy to press a wrong button. Now I shoot that way with the Sony 5N too so the shutter responsiveness (or lack of) has only recently bugged me..

    Does either the Olympus E-P5 or Panasonic GX7 allow minimum shutter speed when auto iso is set? Both cameras appeal to me as potential upgrades for my E-PL5 next year.
     

Share This Page